2016/17 Summer of Cricket

[Twizzle]

which is pretty much what I said, we simply dont have one that is good enough at international level

however, I feel they should be learning their trade at grade or first class level, we seem to give away baggy greens at will this year to try and find a no 6

if they cant do it at first class level our selectors seem willing to gamble on them being successful at international level

 

[Bazal]

I've never minded the idea of Maxwell being given a shot in the right circumstances....he's a phenomenally talented cricketer. His problem has always been that he's a bit of a spaz....but as an all rounder his bowling is ok for what it is and he can be a destructive batsman.

Not every test match calls for an all rounder, that's the issue I have. Sometimes you need 500+ and bar Kallis I can't think of a modern all rounder you could back to make a reasonable contribution to a score like that. And I think to make an all rounder work, from the ones we have, Nevill needs to be in the side batting six and the all rounder at seven.

And tbh in that situation my all rounder would be Faulkner

 

[hineyrulz]

There's nothing wrong with trying to find an allrounder. It's the act of picking them in the test team in the absence of evidence that they are sufficiently capable with at least one of the required skills that is dubious.

Gus Gilmour was our last test quality all rounder, Watson was as close as we have had but his bowling was never good enough to consider him a genuine one.

The laughable thing is these blokes they are struggling in shield cricket what makes them think that at international level they will all of a sudden be good enough.

 

[oldmancraigy]

Gus Gilmour was our last test quality all rounder, Watson was as close as we have had but his bowling was never good enough to consider him a genuine one.

The laughable thing is these blokes they are struggling in shield cricket what makes them think that at international level they will all of a sudden be good enough.

For a whinger like you, backing Gary Gilmour seems odd? 23 at test level and 30 at FC with the bat?? That's Mitch Marsh level....
I don't recall him being anything magical as a batsman?

I'm with Baz. Neville at 6, Faulkner at 7, (Cummins 8, Starc 9). Get a lower middle order going.

Does put a fair bit of pressure on the top 5 though.

 

[hineyrulz]

Faulkner is a much better cricketer than MMarsh, doesn't he is a test match cricketer though. Starc and Cummins are just as capable of scoring runs as a Marsh it Faulkner IMO. And at least they are good enough with the ball.

 

[TheParraboy]

Not every test match calls for an all rounder, that's the issue I have. Sometimes you need 500+ and bar Kallis I can't think of a modern all rounder you could back to make a reasonable contribution to a score like that.

We would be unbeatable if we had the great man

 

[Barry O'Speedwagon]

Faulkner is a much better cricketer than MMarsh, doesn't he is a test match cricketer though. Starc and Cummins are just as capable of scoring runs as a Marsh it Faulkner IMO. And at least they are good enough with the ball.

Faulkner is, at present, a bit better of a bat than Starc or Cummins, but he's certainly not a test #6. He averages 31 in FC cricket with 2 centuries. You might play him at #8 with 2 quicks on a seaming wicket. It'd be good to be a fly on the wall at a night out with Faulkner and SOK.

Stoinis is the better bat of the guys in the mix, and doesn't have super-obvious technical flaws that would quickly get found out. He's the only one of the chaps outside the current team that I'd consider batting at 6 (and there would need to be a good reason to play an allrounder).

 

[hineyrulz]

Faulkner is, at present, a bit better of a bat than Starc or Cummins, but he's certainly not a test #6. He averages 31 in FC cricket with 2 centuries. You might play him at #8 with 2 quicks on a seaming wicket. It'd be good to be a fly on the wall at a night out with Faulkner and SOK.

Stoinis is the better bat of the guys in the mix, and doesn't have super-obvious technical flaws that would quickly get found out. He's the only one of the chaps outside the current team that I'd consider batting at 6 (and there would need to be a good reason to play an allrounder).

Thats the thing Baz, the obsession to play an all rounder in every game no matter what the cost. As you say sometimes in various conditions playing one might come in handy. Still don't think we have any close to test match quality.

 

[Twizzle]

If Faulkner is the best, we should stop looking as he is not international standard imo. He's a decent ODI player but not a test player.

 

[Bazal]

Faulkner has one Test, scored 60 odd runs and took 6 wickets. He could certainly be a Test cricketer.

But he's not a six. Either we play a keeper who can bat six, like Nevill, and the all rounder at 7 (and either Maxwell or Faulkner could be excellent number sevens)....or we play six batsmen and f**k the all rounder off.

 

[Barry O'Speedwagon]

Yeh, if Sam Whiteman picks up his form with the bat a little, he might become a keeper who can bat at 6. But he seems to have dropped off a bit.....to the extent that you can tell based on FC season split in two halves.

In an emergency, Handscomb can keep, but I'm pretty sure they have no long term plans in that regard.

 

[I'm a loser baby...]

Yeh, if Sam Whiteman picks up his form with the bat a little, he might become a keeper who can bat at 6. But he seems to have dropped off a bit.....to the extent that you can tell based on FC season split in two halves.

In an emergency, Handscomb can keep, but I'm pretty sure they have no long term plans in that regard.

Why not? I know he said he doesn't want to keep but is he worse than Wade?

 

[Bazal]

Why not? I know he said he doesn't want to keep but is he worse than Wade?

Might affect his batting

 

[I'm a loser baby...]

Might affect his batting

Worth a shot though, isn't it?

 

[Twizzle]

at test level you need a specialist keeper

 

[I'm a loser baby...]

at test level you need a specialist keeper

Wade's a specialist keeper? Well f**k me... I thought he was the team morale officer

 

[Twizzle]

I think the official reason given is that Neville didn't talk enough on the pitch

 

[Happy MEel]

I think the official reason given is that Neville didn't talk enough on the pitch

Yeah, he was too busy taking catches to think up witty sledges.

 

[I'm a loser baby...]

Niiiiice, Harry!

 

[Barry O'Speedwagon]

SOK told to put SOK in it.

"Australian cricketer Stephen O'Keefe charged by CA over inappropriate comments made while intoxicated
Published: April 7, 2017 - 10:18AM

Australian and NSW Blues spinner Stephen O'Keefe has been sanctioned by Cricket Australia after being involved in an incident at a Cricket NSW function where he made highly inappropriate comments whilst under the influence of alcohol.

According to a CA release on Friday morning, O'Keefe was charged with a breach of Article 2.2.11 of the Code - conduct unbecoming of a representative. As this is O'Keefe's second offence within the last 18 months, a fine of $20,000 was proposed and accepted. O'Keefe will also undergo further appropriate counselling. Given he accepted the proposed sanction and charge, no hearing was required.

In addition, O'Keefe will be excluded from consideration for selection by NSW for the 2017 One-Day Domestic tournament........"

http://www.smh.com.au/sport/cricket...s-made-while-intoxicated-20170407-gvfovp.html